SIX YEARS AGO. Who gives a toss now? Over and over and over again.

The problems are much more deeply ingrained than a bad 2000 draft. And even if that draft was brilliant, we'd still be a rabble now.

What we need to concentrate on is what are we going to do now.

Its true to say that the one year Carlton actually decided to embrace the draft was the one year we were unsuccessful. Of the Class of 2000 only Livo, Wiggler and Sporn remain on the list and there is a very strong chance only Wigglesworth will remain for next year.

Theres no doubtin in hindsight that we could have had better picks but you could say that in every year. For most picks.

But I would ask whether we should be kicking ourselves for 2000 when it was the years of not embracing the draft either side of 2000 that lowered our total number of chances at the draft and restricted our rebuilding process. Look at 1997-1999 and other than Fev most of our draftees will have gone. Look at 2001-2003 and we have Walker and a few others from those picks we were able to keep. To isolate 2000, though an exercise in failure in hindsight, ignores that our Club just hasn't followed the rules that other Clubs have known about for year.

ps Livo's problem is also the back injury he sustained in the 2004 pre-season from memory. It has taken away his leap and he still struggles with it. Blame Carlton all you want but injuries to a back are severely debiliating for anyone let alone an elite sportsperson.

You're right when you say that this draft really hurt us, drafting isn't always about getting stars but success is confirmed when you pick a player that finds a spot in your top 22. We had 3 top 15 picks and that usually increases the likelihood of getting guys good enough to play over 100 games, but it looks like 6 years later 2 of them are out the door and one may have just found his feet. Ideally these blokes should be big bodies by now and able to contribute week in week out, taking the pressure to perform off teenagers like JR. We haven't got the return from 2000, traded ourself out of 2001 and got the penalties from 2002 and 2003, so there's 4 years without much return and now we have a lack of players in their early to mid 20's and it's really hurting us. Imagine what our midfield would look like if we didn't have Scotland and Stevens.

But it's difficult to say the pick was wrong given that the players they have turned into relies so much on the work that the club has put in, their own application and a bit of luck. When Burgoyne was a yongster he was a dainty little guy not unlike JR, now he's turned into a high-intensity fire breathing midfielder who gives 'don't argues' at will because he knows he's the strongest bloke out there with an attitude to match. The trick is to pick the player like JR, who has the tools but not quite the polish, and find a way to get his game to a level where he can use his pace and agility to hurt other teams.

I would argue that even in 2000 we did not fully embrace nor understand the draft (and fear sometimes this still lingers).

Carlton grabbed some great picks and then rather than choose best available talent at the time went for players to fill certain holes.


Would we have chosen Livo is we were not so damn eager to nab a FB?

Would we have taken Sporn if we just went for best talent?


Our attitude screwed us that day - not for the first time.





Hey i thin I am finally getting tyhe hang of this bitterness towards your club. Viva la ordinariness!

_________________
This type of slight is alien in the more cultured part of the world - Walsh. Its up there with mad dogs, Englishmen and the midday sun!

The 2004 draft could end up worse

_________________
If you allow the Government to change the Laws in an emergency
They will create an Emergency to change the Laws

I honestly believe that 1/5 mistakes based on pre-draft information is not good enough. We need to make the right choice with every single draft pick if we're going to get to the top.

But you can make the right choice, and end up with nothing for it. You just can't judge the choices based on hindsight. You must judge them based on the logic behind the choice AT THE TIME. I have said that I think the club (not necessarily the recruiter) made a bad call with Livo by picking for type, not best player available. I don't know enough about the rest of the picks to say either way.

All I'm saying is that if you're going to make criticisms, using hindsight to do it is pointless and naive.

nothing gained from draft picks from 2000 - 2003 must be pagans fault. I say sack him

Livo was widely accepted as the 4th best player on offer at the time. Burgoyne wasn't rated in the top half dozen but Port got him early because his brother was already there ... and it paid off. Plenty of toher duds were recruited in that draft. We just made the mistake of trading into one of the weakest drafts ever.

_________________
In WADA we trust

Time machine threads piss me off.
It's like saying "If only I'd picked 4,12,13,27,31 and 38 I'd have won Tattslotto".

_________________
"One of my favorite philosophical tenets is that people will agree with you only if they already agree with you. You do not change people's minds." - Frank Zappa

Hahaha it might be done and dusted now however you wouldn't want the same mistake happen again would you?
The philosophy we should take into this years draft should be pick the best player available...We can't afford to just fill in holes this year.
So when you say "Who gives a toss now" I do coz if we do not do the "job properley" in drafting this year we could end up with some players like livo's Wiggo's Sprons Beasy's etc which will put us back anotehr 6 years. Would you like that???

We need learn from our mistakes brother and draft correctly this year!

Yes....sounds good.... how would you know you are making a mistake on draft day? Do you think they made the selections thinking they were making mistakes? A little thing called time happened in between to make these decisions look less forthright than on the day.

Other than picking the best player possible with each pick there are no lessons in a historical review. All thought they were making the best decision!

Archilles agree that 2000 was a doozy. However don't look at it in isolation. The years 1996-2001 are a write off bar Fev & Houla.

Some poster holds fears for 2004. I certainly hope JR and Harts come good.

Agreed on your points there as I think drafting was not highly reagrded until we went backwards and got penalized for the draft picks'.
I think alot of posters on here shpould be patient on Harts and Russell we should atleast give them another 2 years atleast seeing as Sporn and Livo have been given 6 or so years...If we chose Gibbs he may take a couple of years to find his feet..you just never know what the pressure of AFL does to these young kids?!

Sporn , Livo and to a lesser extent Wiggens up til this year stats were similar if not better in their 2nd year at the club to what they are in their 6th.

My worry is that Harts , Russel and Blackwell and Betts might go the same way. Chambers and Longmuir from that draft are already gone and Bryan not far behind

Those 2004 draftees dont exactly make me feel warm and fuzzy about the future

_________________
If you allow the Government to change the Laws in an emergency
They will create an Emergency to change the Laws

Simple! Im not saying they purposely made a mistake but most probably didn't spend the time researching properley. I could bet my bottom dollar that we are spending more time and resources picking our draftees now compared to the year 2000 and before.
As for knowing who to pick then we will not know until a few years down the track...By the way we should give J.Davies another go..but that's another story.

I bet the same time and effort is going into this year as with every other year. I'm sure the recruiters in 2000 took time off to go to the beach while this year they'll be working 24/7

The point many are trying to make is that the talls available after pick 1 and 2 in 2000 weren't very good ... simple as that. We responded to some shocking selections by putting Wayne Hughes into the position - lets let him do his stuff and judge him on that.

_________________
In WADA we trust

Thta's not the nature of a footy forum. Doesn't mstter what a top bloke you are, if you don't play good footy ofr your club your the greatest @rsehole of all time. What's more important in life.?!!!

Blackwell looks alright and Betts was a PSD.

FFS sake Elwood - bury that bone or make it a sticky.....

ACHILLES that's just a simplistic bucket of bile, nothing more. Bad years of drafting = 'Probably didn't spend the time researching properly"... so in good years we did more work? Its naive and simplistic to think that it must be the recruiters fault becuase a draft didnt work for us as expected. Recruiters will look at as many players spossible, needs, Board directives etc. and assess in light of available resources etc. Just because Livo, Sporn and Wiggler hasnt worked out doesnt mean that the recruiters didnt work hard.

The main problem has been that we have sort-of embraced the draft once before 2004; that's all. So fans look at all those years and say 'when we did go into it we didnt do well' when we should be saying 'why didnt we have more early picks in other years' which would have been far more beneficial.